Using well-established abbreviations for new concepts in the same field
Should researchers try their best to avoid using existing abbreviations (such as IEEE, WHO, DNA, ANOVA, BMI, CERN, NASA, UNESCO, OPCW, NHS, CDC ...) that are (well-)known in their fields, when creating abbreviations for new concepts (methods, substances, studies ...) in the same field?
Or is it OK if the abbreviation for the new concept is just defined where it is used (e.g., in a publication)?
writing-style
asked 1 hour ago
OrionOrion
2,43512440
add a comment |
Should researchers try their best to avoid using existing abbreviations (such as IEEE, WHO, DNA, ANOVA, BMI, CERN, NASA, UNESCO, OPCW, NHS, CDC ...) that are (well-)known in their fields, when creating abbreviations for new concepts (methods, substances, studies ...) in the same field?
Or is it OK if the abbreviation for the new concept is just defined where it is used (e.g., in a publication)?
writing-style
asked 1 hour ago
OrionOrion
2,43512440
add a comment |
Should researchers try their best to avoid using existing abbreviations (such as IEEE, WHO, DNA, ANOVA, BMI, CERN, NASA, UNESCO, OPCW, NHS, CDC ...) that are (well-)known in their fields, when creating abbreviations for new concepts (methods, substances, studies ...) in the same field?
Or is it OK if the abbreviation for the new concept is just defined where it is used (e.g., in a publication)?
writing-style
asked 1 hour ago
OrionOrion
2,43512440
Should researchers try their best to avoid using existing abbreviations (such as IEEE, WHO, DNA, ANOVA, BMI, CERN, NASA, UNESCO, OPCW, NHS, CDC ...) that are (well-)known in their fields, when creating abbreviations for new concepts (methods, substances, studies ...) in the same field?
Or is it OK if the abbreviation for the new concept is just defined where it is used (e.g., in a publication)?
writing-style
writing-style
asked 1 hour ago
OrionOrion
2,43512440
asked 1 hour ago
OrionOrion
2,43512440
asked 1 hour ago
OrionOrion
2,43512440
asked 1 hour ago
OrionOrion
2,43512440
asked 1 hour ago
OrionOrion
2,43512440
2,43512440
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
Yes, you should avoid using well-established acronyms to mean something else. I would especially avoid those like the ones you present as examples that are likely more recognizable as the acronym than what the acronym stands for: they are effectively words by themselves with a specific meaning.
answered 1 hour ago
Bryan KrauseBryan Krause
12.9k13860
add a comment |
Yes. But then again, no. Depends.
If you can easily avoid it, sure - avoid it. It will only cause confusion in the long run. But this confusion is dependent of the previous acronym being relevant (as opposed to known) in that specific field. So if you are creating a new modular iterating algorithm (stupid example, but you catch my drift), and your last name is Brown, it is OK to call it the Brown Modular Iterator (BMI). No one, in context, will think this is the Body Mass Index.
A slightly different example of when it is OK (not, mind you, optimal) to use an existing acronym which can actually cause confusion, is when there are specific naming conventions. This is how we have the American Sociological Association (ASA), the American Statistical Association (ASA), and the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) - with most societies holding the convention of country_societyname_association, and medical societies to the country_societyof_societyname.
answered 49 mins ago
Yuval SpieglerYuval Spiegler
25116
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "415"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f123957%2fusing-well-established-abbreviations-for-new-concepts-in-the-same-field%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Yes, you should avoid using well-established acronyms to mean something else. I would especially avoid those like the ones you present as examples that are likely more recognizable as the acronym than what the acronym stands for: they are effectively words by themselves with a specific meaning.
answered 1 hour ago
Bryan KrauseBryan Krause
12.9k13860
add a comment |
Yes, you should avoid using well-established acronyms to mean something else. I would especially avoid those like the ones you present as examples that are likely more recognizable as the acronym than what the acronym stands for: they are effectively words by themselves with a specific meaning.
answered 1 hour ago
Bryan KrauseBryan Krause
12.9k13860
add a comment |
Yes, you should avoid using well-established acronyms to mean something else. I would especially avoid those like the ones you present as examples that are likely more recognizable as the acronym than what the acronym stands for: they are effectively words by themselves with a specific meaning.
answered 1 hour ago
Bryan KrauseBryan Krause
12.9k13860
Yes, you should avoid using well-established acronyms to mean something else. I would especially avoid those like the ones you present as examples that are likely more recognizable as the acronym than what the acronym stands for: they are effectively words by themselves with a specific meaning.
answered 1 hour ago
Bryan KrauseBryan Krause
12.9k13860
answered 1 hour ago
Bryan KrauseBryan Krause
12.9k13860
answered 1 hour ago
Bryan KrauseBryan Krause
12.9k13860
answered 1 hour ago
Bryan KrauseBryan Krause
12.9k13860
12.9k13860
add a comment |
add a comment |
Yes. But then again, no. Depends.
If you can easily avoid it, sure - avoid it. It will only cause confusion in the long run. But this confusion is dependent of the previous acronym being relevant (as opposed to known) in that specific field. So if you are creating a new modular iterating algorithm (stupid example, but you catch my drift), and your last name is Brown, it is OK to call it the Brown Modular Iterator (BMI). No one, in context, will think this is the Body Mass Index.
A slightly different example of when it is OK (not, mind you, optimal) to use an existing acronym which can actually cause confusion, is when there are specific naming conventions. This is how we have the American Sociological Association (ASA), the American Statistical Association (ASA), and the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) - with most societies holding the convention of country_societyname_association, and medical societies to the country_societyof_societyname.
answered 49 mins ago
Yuval SpieglerYuval Spiegler
25116
add a comment |
Yes. But then again, no. Depends.
If you can easily avoid it, sure - avoid it. It will only cause confusion in the long run. But this confusion is dependent of the previous acronym being relevant (as opposed to known) in that specific field. So if you are creating a new modular iterating algorithm (stupid example, but you catch my drift), and your last name is Brown, it is OK to call it the Brown Modular Iterator (BMI). No one, in context, will think this is the Body Mass Index.
A slightly different example of when it is OK (not, mind you, optimal) to use an existing acronym which can actually cause confusion, is when there are specific naming conventions. This is how we have the American Sociological Association (ASA), the American Statistical Association (ASA), and the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) - with most societies holding the convention of country_societyname_association, and medical societies to the country_societyof_societyname.
answered 49 mins ago
Yuval SpieglerYuval Spiegler
25116
add a comment |
Yes. But then again, no. Depends.
If you can easily avoid it, sure - avoid it. It will only cause confusion in the long run. But this confusion is dependent of the previous acronym being relevant (as opposed to known) in that specific field. So if you are creating a new modular iterating algorithm (stupid example, but you catch my drift), and your last name is Brown, it is OK to call it the Brown Modular Iterator (BMI). No one, in context, will think this is the Body Mass Index.
A slightly different example of when it is OK (not, mind you, optimal) to use an existing acronym which can actually cause confusion, is when there are specific naming conventions. This is how we have the American Sociological Association (ASA), the American Statistical Association (ASA), and the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) - with most societies holding the convention of country_societyname_association, and medical societies to the country_societyof_societyname.
answered 49 mins ago
Yuval SpieglerYuval Spiegler
25116
Yes. But then again, no. Depends.
If you can easily avoid it, sure - avoid it. It will only cause confusion in the long run. But this confusion is dependent of the previous acronym being relevant (as opposed to known) in that specific field. So if you are creating a new modular iterating algorithm (stupid example, but you catch my drift), and your last name is Brown, it is OK to call it the Brown Modular Iterator (BMI). No one, in context, will think this is the Body Mass Index.
A slightly different example of when it is OK (not, mind you, optimal) to use an existing acronym which can actually cause confusion, is when there are specific naming conventions. This is how we have the American Sociological Association (ASA), the American Statistical Association (ASA), and the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) - with most societies holding the convention of country_societyname_association, and medical societies to the country_societyof_societyname.
answered 49 mins ago
Yuval SpieglerYuval Spiegler
25116
answered 49 mins ago
Yuval SpieglerYuval Spiegler
25116
answered 49 mins ago
Yuval SpieglerYuval Spiegler
25116
answered 49 mins ago
Yuval SpieglerYuval Spiegler
25116
25116
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Academia Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f123957%2fusing-well-established-abbreviations-for-new-concepts-in-the-same-field%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
